In addition, such broad-spectrum assays, can potentially miss types present in much lower concentrations than others, when multiple HPV types are present, as they commonly are in sexually active young women [7], [20], [21], [22] and [23] hence non-vaccine type HPV infection

may have been underestimated in the pre-immunisation survey due to “masking” by co-infection with HPV 16/18 [24] and [21]. There may also have been temporal changes in the prevalence of some or all non-vaccine types (unrelated to immunisation) Libraries between 2008 and 2010–2012. The reduction in the prevalence of HPV 31, 33 and 45, against the backdrop of increased non-vaccine HR-HPV is consistent with some cross-protective efficacy against these types. It will be interesting to see whether the change in age-specific pattern that we have seen for HPV16/18 emerges for these types in subsequent analyses. The Selleck Tanespimycin use of a convenience source of residual genital specimens from young women undergoing chlamydia screening around England allows a large sample to assess the early impact of the HPV immunisation programme. Women screened for chlamydia tend to be at higher risk KRX-0401 cost of chlamydia infection than the general population [25] and may therefore be at increased risk of HPV infection, which likely increases power to detect changes, but limits representativeness of the general population

with regard to risk of HPV and uptake of HPV immunisation. Florfenicol In 2011, an estimated 41% of females aged 16–24 years were screened for chlamydia (assuming one test per person). This was an increase from approximately 15% in 2008/09. It is possible, therefore, that the population from which our specimens were drawn had changed somewhat between 2008 and 2010–2012. There was no evidence of a change in reported sexual behaviour. However, missing data

on sexual behaviour increased, likely associated with the large increase in testing in venues where this was not asked, and this limited our ability to track shifts in the risk profile of this specimen source. Studies from other countries have shown similar findings since have introduction of HPV immunisation programmes using the quadrivalent vaccine. Tabrizi et al. [26] compared a survey of 202 women aged 18–24 years old in 2005–2007 to a similar survey of 404 women from 2010 to 2011 in Australia, with estimated coverage 86%, and showed a substantial decrease (28.7% to 6.7%) in the vaccine-targeted genotypes (16/18/6/11) as well as a slightly lower prevalence of non-vaccine oncogenic types. Markowitz et al. [27] have analysed data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys in the United States. Amongst women aged 14–19 years, the prevalence of the HPV vaccine-types (16/18/6/11) decreased from 11.5% in 1363 unvaccinated women in 2003–2006 to 5.1% in 740 women in 2007–2010 with an estimated vaccination coverage of 34% for one dose or more.